Senators introduce bill to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions (by 2050)

[Robbien]

In other words a license to freely pollute as much as possible for 43 more years.

The new bill (S. 280) will gradually lower the emissions cap, such that it reaches approximately one third of 2000 levels by 2050. Those long-term reductions will forestall catastrophic, manmade climate change, provided the world's other major economies follow suit within the next decade. Like the 2005 version, the reintroduced bill controls compliance costs by allowing companies to trade, save, and borrow emissions credits, and by allowing them to generate "offset" credits by inducing non-covered businesses, farms, and others to reduce their emissions or capture and store greenhouse gases. The reintroduced bill, however, increases the availability of borrowing and offsets in order to control costs further.

http://www.reviewatlas.com/articles/2007/01/15/news/local/news4.txt

Bill sponsored by : Joe Lieberman (ID-CT), John McCain (R-AZ), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Susan Collins (R-ME) and Barack Obama (D-IL).

[Amonester]

1. Too little too late.

Better run to the hills.

It's over.

[Tellurian]

14. Lieberman and McCain...

sure, if the War doesn't get ya, the pollution will!

[Emillereid]

2. According to my reading of the science, this is way too little, too late!

[lovuian]

4. Bingo this is just seeing the writing on the wall

and have to do SOMETHING to placate concerned Americans

[peacebird]

3. By co-sponsoring this bill Barack Obama has just had his first serious mis-step

There are many who think he is too inexperienced for the presidency. By signing on as a sponsor of this milque-toast bill he has shown a lack of leadership, imho. Global warming needs to be addressed seriously, and this bill merely pretends to address it. It is a bill providing political cover for congrsscritters who want to look like they are "taking action" when in reality they are doing next to nothing.

[Robbien]

5. This bill is not just doing next to nothing, it is a golden ticket to pollute

A big gimme for big business.

Just as the Clean Water Bill meant dump as much waste in the water as possible.
Just as the Clean Skies Bill meant dirty up the air as much as possible.
and so on , , ,

[peacebird]

7. I agree - which is why I said Barack Obama made a serious mis-step in his run for the presidency

[CrazyOrangeCat]

6. What a joke.

What an insult.

[VegasWolf]

8. Unfortunately, Florida sinks in 2030. nt

[Greeby]

9. As opposed to a REAL bill on climate change

Introduced by the Senators from Vermont
http://sanders.senate.gov/files/global-warm-statement.cfm

[globalvillage]

10. Kerry and Snowe introduced a much better bill last year

S.4039
Global Warming Reduction Act of 2006 (Introduced in Senate)`

(B) beginning not later than calendar year 2010, to reverse increases in global warming pollution emissions so as to achieve, by not later than calendar year 2050, a 65-percent reduction in global warming pollution emissions in the United States (as compared to those global warming pollution emissions for calendar year 2000).

[Zhade]

23. I'm not seeing the difference, except in wording.

so as to achieve, by not later than calendar year 2050, a 65-percent reduction in global warming pollution emissions in the United States (as compared to those global warming pollution emissions for calendar year 2000)

versus

gradually lower the emissions cap, such that it reaches approximately one third of 2000 levels by 2050

Unless I'm reading this wrong, both bills calls for a 2/3rds reduction by 2050. How is it different than the Kerry/Snowe bill?

Don't get me wrong - if I'm correct, BOTH bills are too little too late, and the problem may well be irresolvable by 2050.

[entanglement]

11. 2050 is too early, I recommend 2200 to start cutting emissions.

:sarcasm:

[Trillo]

12. Meanwhile, in appeasment to the corporate overlords,

immigrants will be encouraged and families will continue to keep breeding in excess of one child per, so that by the time 2050 rolls around, the pain of these cutbacks will press hard upon that future's even greater masses, while a few will relax in luxurious splendor on bases on the moon, awaiting their astronomically-priced private flight to the "new solar system", the affordability enabled by years of gaming the carbon trading system.

[NotGivingUp]

13. waaaaay too little...waaaay too late. what a freaking bunch of jerks

[hatrack]

15. 2050!! Do I hear 2055 - 2055 . . . to the gentleman with the shit-eating grin!

2075, who'll give me 2075, 2075 . . . 2075!! 2075 to the Pseudo-Democrat from Connecticut. 2075, can I hear a 2080, 2080 2080 2080 . . . 2080 to the oozing mass of senescence from Arizona . . . 2080 . . . 2090 . . . going once! Going twice!! The planet's capability to support civilization SOLD to the gentlemen from Arizona and Connecticut!!!!

And such a bargain, too!!!!

[Robbien]

17. Note the bill only takes pollution limits back to . . . six years ago, the year 2000 emissions,

So this great and wonderous bill will take fifty years to reduce emissions back to that of the year 2000.

And note the audacity of the politicians saying they hope the rest of the world will jump on board. Heck, for the rest of the world to jump on board this plan, they will have to madly increase their pollution making capabilities.

[Gloria]

16. I'll be dead by then, but good luck....

[YankeyMCC]

18. A better bill

I don't know if even this will be enough but there is another Senate bill that calls for more:

(snip)
The legislation due to be introduced Tuesday in the Senate would reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and by 2050 require an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gases over the 1990 level.

To reach those goals, the bill would use a combination of mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by setting strict standards for electric power plants and vehicles. It would encourage conservation and new, cleaner energy technologies.
(snip)

http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2007/01/15/sanders_leahy_re_introduce_jeffords_global_warming_bill/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News

I posted yesterday: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2689749&mesg_id=2689749

[Earth_First]

19. Kyoto accomplishes this by 2012

I love how politicians are all about it, only 43 years from now as opposed to 5.

[Psephos]

24. How much does Kyoto reduce China's emissions by 2012?

Big problem, there, given China is the world's #2 emitter of greenhouse gases. They will be #1 pretty soon.

Peace.

[jsamuel]

20. this is a farse of a bill... 2050?!

[nam78_two]

21. K&R.nt

[slipslidingaway]

22. K&R nt